197 

.2a 

»y l 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

I [Mill Hill MM! "Ill HIM >>" ■!!!! ' " ".:'! j | 



021 048 342 1 I 




SPEECH 



op 

HON, RICHARD BRODHEAD, OF PA, 

il 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, MARCH 15, 1852, 



ON THE 



PUBLIC LANDS— GRADUATION AND REDUCTION OF THE PRICE THEREOF, 

PREFERABLE TO GRANTS OF ALTERNATE SECTIONS TO AID IN THE 

CONSTRUCTION OF RAILROADS— GRANTS TO ACTUAL SETTLERS, 

CESSION TO THE STATES, &c, BRIEFLY CONSIDERED. 



(( ~ 

Mr. BRODHEAD said: \\ <J* B j I 

It is not my purpose, Mr. President, to make what is called a regular 
speech. As the votes are about to be taken on this model and pioneer 
bill, I only design, briefly, to explain those I am about to give, and the 
substitute I am about to propose. The points and propositions which 
will control my action upon this and the many other similar bills grant- 
ing alternate sections of the public lands, five miles on each side of the 
road, (and doubling the price of those retained,) for the purpose of aiding 
in the construction of railroads, I may discuss fully hereafter. I will 
do little more than state them now. 

Much interest is felt not only in the new, but in the old States, in 
regard to the public lands. Now that the slavery question seems to be 
settled, agitation in regard to the public lands has commenced. A con- 
test between the old and the new States, now threatened, should be 
avoided, and the questions settled upon just, equitable, and constitutional 
principles. 

I cannot vote for these alternate-section railroad bills for several rea- 
sons, although I would like to do so very much to accommodate the 
amiable, talented, and accomplished representatives from Iowa, [Messrs. 
Dodge and Jones,] whose bill is now under consideration. I feel em- 
barrassed, because my heart is on one side and my judgment and duty 
as a Senator on the other. 

Five propositions are now before Congress upon the subject of the 
public lands. Debate has been had upon all, and bills submitted to 
carry some into effect : 

1. To grant alternate sections to aid in the construction of railroads. 
Fifteen millions of acres per annum would thus be taken for years to 
come. 

2. To divide them in kind among all the States- — the old States taking 



as much as are given to the new ones, for purposes of internal improve- 
ment. 

3. To give them to actual settlers. About four millions of acres per 
annum would thus be taken. Adopt this plan, and continue the issue 
of land warrants now authorized by law to the soldiers, and very little 
revenue will be received from the sales of the public lands, and the 
expenses of the land s} r stem will be thrown upon the Treasury. 

4. To cede them to the States in which they he. 

5. To graduate and reduce the price. 

These alternate-section bills do not commend themselves to my favor- 
able consideration, because — 

1. They connect this Government with a system of internal improve- 
ments which, in my opinion, involves a necessity for a latitudinous con- 
struction of the Constitution violative of its principles. They provide 
for an internal-improvement system in disguise. It is an oblique mode 
of legislation. 

2. These bills, if passed, will derange our admirable land system, 
which has worked so well for many years past, and bring numerous- 
applicants here for years to come. They are local and partial in their 
character, and will change the course of settlement from one part of a 
State to another. They do not provide general "rules and regulations." 

3. They assert the principle that this Government can aid works of 
internal improvement in States where there are public lands, and cannot 
where there are none. 

4. In point of fact, they provide for a partial distribution of the public 
lands injurious to the old States, and portions of the new ones, through 
which the roads do not pass. Besides, they facilitate the creation of 
monopolies ; for as soon as the grants are made to States, as in the case 
of the Illinois grant, they are forthwith transferred to railroad companies. 

5. The public lands have cost this Government, composed of all the 
States, large sums of money, and large sums have been received there- 
for. The records show that we have received nearly as much as we 
have paid out, provided the Indian annuities, and Indian department, 
and Indian wars, are not taken into consideration. The account is 
pretty nearly balanced, and there remains vast quantities unsold. It 
is estimated that we have about fourteen hundred millions of acres, inclu- 
ding the Indian territory, undisposed of. In view of the increasing 
strength of the western country, and of the fact that marry of our lands 
have been a long time in market, and the States cannot tax them ; and 
in view of many other considerations, I think it is proper to graduate 
and reduce the price thereof, not only to actual settlers, but generally. 

6. Graduate and reduce the price of the public lands, and leave the 
construction of railroads, &c, as in the old States, to State and individual 
enterprise. This plan is simple: it furnishes cheap homes to poor 
settlers, promotes good feeling among the States, abates the tendency to 
centralization, prevents monopolies, and is free from constitutional ob- 
jections. Our land system presents other questions besides those of money 
and finance. 

These are some of the large objections which I have to these alternate- 
section bills. They are decided, radical, and constitutional, and such as 



in my judgment outweigh any considerations of public policy which may 
be urged in their behalf. 

My objections, if good, are equally decisive against the amendment of 
the honorable Senator from Kentucky, [Mr. Underwood.] That pro- 
vides for an equal grant to the old States for purposes of internal improve- 
ment. If a grant cannot be properly made to one of the land States for 
purposes of internal improvement, it follows that it cannot be made to 
the old States, to say nothing of the propriety or impropriety of one State 
holding lands in another. If a division is to be made, the most unobjec- 
tionable mode, in my opinion, is to divide the proceeds of the sales of 
the public lands among all the States. I do not say that I favor that 
policy; I only wish now to be understood as saying that I prefer it to 
the proposition submitted by the honorable Senator from Kentucky. 
The lands are now indebted to the customs. It will take fifty-five or 
sixty millions of acres yet to satisfy the land warrants recently authorized 
to be issued to soldiers. Large sums are yet due the different tribes of 
Indians under treaties. The expenses of the land department are very 
heavy. All things considered, I do not believe this Government will 
ever receive a dollar of net revenue from lands; and therefore, if distri- 
bution is made to the States, it must be from moneys collected at the 
custom-houses. If all the public lands should be ceded to the States in 
which they lie, and we have nothing but the proceeds of the sales in the 
Territories, the lands, I am quite certain, will bring us annually in debt. 
I want the revenue from the lands to pay for their purchase, the Indian 
annuities, and the cost of their administration. The Post Office Depart- 
ment is made to support itself — so should the land department. 

There may be defects in our present land system, but I doubt whether 
human wisdom could devise one which would thus far have worked 
better. We must have a general system. Time and circumstances 
may demand a modification of the present one. We are here to make 
general laws for the public good, and the fewer they are in number the 
better. All governments should have some settled policy. We cannot 
legislate in regard to particular localities. We cannot properly or wisely 
judge whether a railroad should run east, west, north, or south. Some of 
the old States might want a road to run one way — some another way. 
Hence questions are brought up not proper for adjudication in Congress. 
Why should we provide for a sale and settlement of the public lands in a 
particular part of a new State, and not another? There is but one 
rational answer to this question. Every general law will operate inju- 
riously in particular cases, and therefore complaints may seem to be justly 
made ; but it should be remembered that it is much easier to point to 
defects than to devise remedies, to touch blemishes than to extract them, 
to demolish an edifice than to erect a convenient substitute. 

If we should cede the public lands to the twelve States in which they 
lie, we would still be obliged to keep up the land and Indian depart- 
ments for the Territories. A cession would not, therefore, much diminish 
the expenses ; nor would it, in my opinion, much more benefit the new 
States than to graduate and reduce the price. If the new States were 
to take them, they would be obliged to incur the expense of their admin- 
istration* Besides, one State would adopt one system, and another 



State another. The good of the country does not require at present so 
rash a disruption of the present system. These twelve land States now 
ask a cession to them of the public lands within their territorial limits. 
Some of the old States refuse, and demand that the proceeds of the sales 
thereof be divided among all. Men sometimes display great wisdom in 
making concessions at the proper time, where principle is not concerned. 
Charles I. had no wisdom of this sort, and lost his head; George III. did 
not know when to yield a little, and lost his colonies. The manufacturers 
made a great mistake in not accepting McKay's tariff bill in 1844, for 
in 1846 one was passed far more objectionable to them. It seems to me 
that the Representatives of the old States ought now to agree to graduate 
and reduce the price of the public lands; and the Representatives of the 
new States ought to give up these numerous railroad projects, by means 
of which the}' expect to get most of the public lands, and break up the 
present land system. 

The bill under consideration is called "A bill granting the right of 
way and making a grant of land to the State of Iowa in aid of the con- 
struction of certain railroads in said State" To the grant of a right of way 
I have no objections. 1 nat would be a valuable grant in the old States. 
The real object of the bill is indicated in the title- — to wit: "to aid in the 
construction of railroads." It will not do to call a plan to aid in the 
construction of railroads a measure to settle and improve the public 
lands. That is begging the question, and the assumption of the main 
point in dispute. That would be making the incident greater than the 
principal. Those who come here to get these bills passed, in order to 
have them go into the hands of corporations, have no surplus love for 
the poor settlers. I wish to call things by their right names in legisla- 
tion ; that is the way to let the people know what we are doing. If it is 
right for us to build a railroad, or to aid in building one, let us do it at 
once, not by indirection. These bills not looking directly to, and having 
for their primary object a sale and settlement of the public lands, it 
follows, as a matter of course, that they involve the Federal Government 
in a system of internal improvement — opposition to which has now be- 
come a fundamental article in the creed of the Democratic party. We 
all know when abreach is once made in a constitution or a great principle, 
how easily and how speedily it is widened. Last year one bill of this 
sort passed, and now ten or fifteen are proposed, asking ten or fifteen 
millions of acres. Next year the number will be the same, if not 
greater. 

Every intelligent man who has witnessed the working of the Federal 
Government must see the tendency to consolidation. The States seem 
to be fast becoming mere corporations, looking to the Federal Govern- 
ment for support. Congress is constantly besieged to overstep its legit- 
imate powers. Annually hereafter grants of land will be asked, until 
all is exhausted in the States, and then applications will come from the 
Territories. Wherever there is power, there seems to be a disposition 
to use and abuse it. All admit that a strict construction of the Consti- 
tution — a forbearance to exercise any power except where an express 
grant for it can be found in the Constitution — is necessary to the preser- 
vation and perpetuity of this Government; and yet the restrictions and 



5 

limitations of the Constitution seem to be of no avail when ambition 
prompts or interest leads the wa}^. We have a Government formed 
of external and internal sovereignties. The general and great purposes 
of the Union are to protect us against foreign invasion, to defend us 
against commotions and insurrections, and to regulate our intercourse 
with foreign nations. All other matters, with few exceptions, in the 
machinery of our Government are left to the States. If this doctrine of 
strict construction can be enforced, Congress will no longer be besieged 
by jobbers, contractors, and speculators, and people will cease to think 
that the world can be legislated into the millennium. If discord among 
the States, rebellion, and anarchy, shall ever destroy this fair land, it will 
be because this Government has assumed powers not granted by the 
Constitution. Look at the fearful ratio of increase of expenditure upon 
the part of this Government. But a few years ago the annual expenses 
only amounted to about thirty millions of dollars, now they are over 
fifty millions. It seems almost impossible to resist those who come here 
to capture the public Treasury or appropriate to themselves the public 
lands. 

It is said, however, in answer to constitutional scruples, that it has 
been the practice of the Government to grant alternate sections to aid in 
the construction of canals and the improvement of rivers. Precedents 
are cited, and the aid of great names called in. Sir, I admit the prece- 
dents, but deny their force. Precedents ! Why, they can be found in 
this Government for anything and everything. They rise up like Ban- 
quo' s ghost. Our evil deeds live after us. We are not in Westminster 
Hall, however, where precedents are considered binding. Great names 
are brought forward. Mr. Calhoun's opinion has been cited. Upon 
what great question of constitutional construction have not our great 
statesmen been about equally divided?- — and some of them have been 
found upon both sides of the same question. Take the questions of the 
bank, tariff, internal improvements, sub-treasury, slavery, &c, and I 
can show the opinions of statesmen equally eminent on both sides. I 
therefore think it my duty to read the Constitution for myself; and if I 
am in doubt, I go on the side which gives least power to the General 
Government, and most to the States. I confess that I prefer the opin- 
ions expressed by President Polk in his celebrated veto message of the 
river and harbor bill, to those of any other statesman upon the subject 
of internal improvements. 

The Constitution gives Congress "power to dispose of and make all 
needful rules and regulations respecting the territory and other property 
belonging to the United States." The bills we are called upon to pass, 
do not purport to make any general "rules" (and all rules we make here 
should be general) respecting the public lands. Who will deny the cor- 
rectness of this proposition? If we authorize railroads through the 
different land States, and change the price sometimes within five and 
sometimes within fifteen miles of the roads, every one must see that 
speculation, injustice, and endless confusion and litigation must be the 
result. If we grant lands to aid one railroad, we must make grants to 
aid all other projected roads. We make rules — in other words, we 
make laws — with a view to dispose of the public lands — not with a view 



6 

to construct railroads and canals. Besides, what right have we to make 
rules which will promote the sale and settlement of the public lands in 
one section of a State, and not in another? Who will say that this ques- 
tion is not properly put? Every man of experience, it seems to me, 
must see the confusion, beneficial only to speculators, to which such a 
policy would lead. And again : everybody knows that nearly all the 
lands upon the line of these roads have been sold. Why, then, call it a 
bill granting alternate sections, when it is well known that they will be 
obliged to go off ten or fifteen miles from the line of the road to get the 
required quantity — to wit, five miles on each side of the road? 

It has been said, and intimated again and again, that this Government 
and the old States have acted unjustly toward the new States. I can- 
not admit the fact. By compacts with the new States upon their 
admission into the Union, five per cent, of the net receipts of the sales 
of the public lands is set apart for the use of such States. Three per 
cent, is to be annually paid to the respective (new) States, and two per 
cent, to be used in constructing roads to and through them. In most 
instances, however, the whole five per cent, has been paid to the new 
States. Out of this three and two per cent, fund over $4,000,000 have 
been paid to the new States. Nearly $6,000,000 more were expended 
in constructing the Cumberland road, to and through the public lands. 
The General Government paid the expenses of each State while a Terri- 
tory, and gave each a kind of outfit. Besides, over twenty millions 
acres of the public lands have been given to the new States for common 
schools, universities, seats of government, salines, deaf and dumb asy- 
lums, &c. 

And again: as an evidence that this Government has extended a 
kind and liberal hand to the people of the West and Southwest, look 
at their past, present, and prospective growth in all the elements of indi- 
vidual, social, and national wealth and prosperity. It is unexampled in 
the history of nations. Every stroke of the woodman's axe beyond the 
Mississippi seems to enlarge their dominion and augment their power. 
To no one does this prosperity afford more sincere pleasure than to 
myself. It is a great and glorious spectacle to see the human family 
thus going out, not lawlessly, but under the benign influences of our Gov- 
ernment, to cultivate and subdue the earth, and peaceably to possess its 
broad patrimony. I would not deal grudgingly with such a people. 
For many reasons, which I might state, I believe they will do as much, 
if not more than any other portion of our people to preserve and perpet- 
uate this Government. They must trade in the East, and hence the 
preservation of the Union is necessary for them. We ought to adopt a 
liberal policy towards those who lead the way in bringing into subjec- 
tion the wild and unbroken lands of the wilderness. Hence I bring 
forward this measure to graduate and reduce the price of the public 
lands, (in lieu of these railroad projects,) which will operate beneficially 
to the bard-working pioneer, and cut up the schemes of speculators by 
the roots. It must be apparent to all that w r e must choose one measure 
or the other I prefer the graduating one. It is the only one which, in 
my opinion, can pass the House The more landholders we have, the 
greater the security for our present form of government. Besides, the 



rights and interests of the laboring classes should be looked to and cared 
for. If there is no place where they can obtain land cheap, the supply 
of labor in the old States will become greater than the demand, and then 
wages will be forced down as they are in Europe. The evils of a 
redundant population should be avoided, especially in a Republic. I 
would like to see every laboring man have a home which he could call 
his own, and which he has purchased, however cheap, Men, in this 
country, though poor, do not like to live upon the charity of their neigh- 
bors, or upon the bounty of their Government. I am willing that the 
Western people should go on prospering and complaining. Prosperity 
in the West benefits the East. They can make larger purchases of 
manufactured articles, and, besides, they must bring their products over 
our railroads and canals. The interests of all are reciprocal. That 
great philosopher and statesman, (Thomas Jefferson,) who looked further 
behind and further before him than any other man of his day, made a 
remark which may well be applied to the Western people and western 
States : 

"So we have gone on," (are his words,) " and so we shall go on, puzzled and prospering 
beyond example, and shall continue to growl, to multiply, and to prosper, until we exhibit an 
association powerful, wise, and happy beyond what has yet been seen by man." 

Those who ask the passage of these bills complain that public lands 
have been a long time in market, and have not been sold, and that it 
ought to be a part of the policy of the Government to adopt measures to 
promote sale and settlement. I admit that a large part of the public 
domain has been a long time in market; but the reason for it is apparent. 
The records show that the supply is greater than the demand. We 
survey and bring annually into market about 12,000,000 of acres, and 
the annual demand is about 3,000,000. If we pass all these railroad 
bills, we will only be able to sell about half that quantity, because the 
States or railroad companies to whom these grants are made will supply 
the other half. It has always been a part of the wise policy of this Gov- 
ernment, I admit, to promote the sale and settlement of the public lands. 
General Jackson, as far back as 1832, well said in his annual message 
of that year : 

" It cannot be doubted that the speedy settlement of these lands constitute the true interest of 
the Republic. The wealth and strength of a country are its population; and the best part of 
the population are the cultivators of the soil. Independent farmers are everywhere the basis of 
society and true friends of liberty. It seems to be our true policy that the public lands shall 
cease, as soon as practicable, to be a source of revenue." 

Hence I now propose the graduating policy as better calculated to 
accomplish that purpose than these railroad schemes. Lands which 
have only been in market ten years sell for $1 25, the present price of 
all; those which have been in market over ten, and not exceeding fif- 
teen, sell for $1 ; those in market for fifteen, and not exceeding twenty, 
eighty cents ; those in market twenty, and not exceeding twenty-five 
years, sell for sixty cents per acre ; those in market for twenty-five, and 
not exceeding thirty years, sell for forty cents per acre ; and those in 
market more than thirty sell for twenty cents. The bill I propose also 
makes provision for preemptioners. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS % 



s 021 048 342 1 

It is only on the ground that these railroad bills will promote sale and 
settlement, that their constitutionality is justified; and I therefore submit 
that, waiving the constitutional question, the measure which I advocat 
as a substitute would be much more efficient in promoting that object, 
as well as more just and equitable to all parts of the country. Its con- 
stitutionality is admitted by all, and it is the only measure which I think 
can pass the House of Representatives. I offer it as a compromise 
measure. 

It is urged, as another reason in favor of these bills, that it would be 
unjust to permit the new States to construct railroads whereby the value 
of the public domain would be augmented, without making some ade- 
quate compensation. It is said that the United States is a great land 
proprietor, and should aid in improving the country and its own lands. 
Now, sir, there is a perfect answer to this argument. Does not every 
railroad and canal made, from the Atlantic border to the western waters, 
improve the price of the public lands? Therefore, if the new States are 
to be compensated, the old States should also be compensated, and the 
General Government would have little else to do than to adjust balances. 
Pennsylvania would come in for a large share, for she has incurred 
more debts in the construction of railroads and canals leading to the 
West than any other State in the Union. 

It is further urged, as an argument in favor of these bills, that the 
Government, although it grants alternate sections five miles on each side 
of the roads, makes money by the operation, because it doubles the price 
of those retained, and thus promotes sale and settlement. Now, although 
this is true to some extent, it is not a better measure than the one I pro- 
pose ; besides, it is liable to the many objections which I have stated. 

But, if the construction of these railroads do thus enhance the value of 
the public domain, why do not those who desire to construct them enter 
and take up all the land through which they pass at the minimum price 
before they begin the work, and thus the increase in value will inure to 
their own advantages, and not to that of the Government. Those who 
wish lands can therefore sequester them for their own use. 

But the practical operation of these grants, as exemplified in the case 
of the grant at the first session of the last Congress to Illinois, is this: 
the grant is made to the State, and forthwith a company is incorporated, 
the grant transferred to the company, and thus a railroad company 
becomes the owner of vast bodies of land, mortgages the same, and thus 
constructs the road. I do not think the General Government ought thus 
to lend itself to create facilities for the multiplication of incorporated 
companies. On Saturday last, I observed by the papers, a compli- 
mentary dinner was given at one of the hotels in this city, by a commit- 
tee of this Illinois railroad company to the Illinois delegation in Congress, 
in honor of their success. They came here, no doubt, to return thanks 
for the patronage of the Federal Government. 

I have thus, Mr. President, briefly, though I fear imperfectly, stated 
my views upon the important subject now under consideration. I have 
studied language to ascertain with how few words I could state facts 
and arguments and make myself understood : The Senate and my con- 
stituents will judge with what success upon this occasion. 






LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

iiiiii inn iini hi in ill mil ]ii| 11:11 ; || |||||||| 



021 048 342 1 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

i imii iiiii urn "HI III!! M 1 " '" ""! !!l!' M 



021 048 342 1 



